Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote:

Hi,

> Imo, provide as much information as possible, describe all
> paths of logic, dont assume bugwranglers are psychic. Verbosity
> can be your friend.

I understand that often there's more information need. But isn't 
this exactly what the NEEDINFO status is for ? 

If, for example, my mozilla-launcher bug would have been marked 
as NEEDINFO, it would have been totally clear that I just have to
tell a little bit more about my problem. 

But this wasn't the case. The bug was simply marked as invalid. 
So the message is: "not an Gentoo problem - your fault".

I have the strange feeling, certain wranglers see b.g.o as an 
helpdesk system, not an place for reporting and discussing about
problems. 

> I'm still at a loss why theres any need for symlinks to the
> coda FS when you could just tell firefox to build a profile
> /directly/ on that coda-fs.

a) The profile *is* on Coda. Problem #1: Coda's permission handling 
   is different than in traditional Unix. ls -la may not show not 
   that username/uid the mozilla-launcher scripts expects to see. 
   Looking on owner-uid and mode simply isn't an reliable source
   on ACLs. This is not really Coda specific.

b) I'm using the symlinks to get temporary data out of the Coda,
   back to the local disk. Simply for reducnig traffic + latencies.
   Also not Coda specific, but generally for network filesystems.
   Of course it would be easier, if FF simply wouldn't store 
   temporary stuff within the profile, but where it belongs ($TMP).
   But symlinks for good for all Mozilla apps.

> If you can't on your own convince a dev to change a bugs status,
> find other people with  similar problems to increase the validity
> of your claim.

I won't more time on that issue. It's fixed for me.

BTW: if the devs would come to the conclusion that they don't have 
and good solution or don't feed the need to fix it in reasonable
time, why isn't the bug status "LATER" or "WONTFIX" ?

<snip>

> Just look in -dev for your daily dose of flame war/soap opera. ( if
> your going to have a 100+ message  flamewar that started from somebody
> complaining and missunderstanding an 'inside' joke, it looks kinda
> evident that some devs love arguing for the sake of it... so with that
> in mind, play safe, be nice :) )

Well, I'm involved in many projects, subscribed in uncountable maillists.
I never ever seen such an high flamewar level as @g.o. And I can't 
remember on any personal attacks nor arguments like doing sth some way
just to be different.

> In favour of what Enrico did, although for all the world it seems like
> he fought a bit and went against advice, he found a problem, and
> provided the means for a solution, and placed it in bugzilla.

> Despite it being marked invalid, that bug will remain in there for
> the rest of the natural life of bugzilla, and if anyone else out
> there /does/ have the misfortune of having the same problem later,
> they'll find it

Since I learned what's going on @bgo, that's the only reason why I 
post there. Just for the records, so other people can find it there.
I'd never ever expect the devs to take up any bit. 

My idealism from the first days is all lost. Obviously none of my 
help is ever wanted, so I go my own way and leave them alone. 
I continue maintaining my own overlay and regularily announcing
it via press releases, etc.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list